Unsorted FBI Documents

Attachment to Independent Case Review Report
• For -CDRU # 1.210 Case file' #. 95A-H0- 1027.16 7

Material Examiner Malone (RQ)

Remarks :

INDEPENDENT CASE REVIEW REPORT

Independent Review conducted by: - Steve R obertson • -

i

Area(s) of Expertise: Hair and Fiber ^

Review commenced at: 1 :00 PM (Time), 09/15 /99 (Date)

File#: 95-1027167 •

Laboratory #(s): 20504028

Examiner(s) & Symbols

Reviewed

Not Reviewed

•Reviewed

Not Reviewed

RQ

x, ■

o' . - •

□

QY •

□

— X .

o

• □

o

□ .

□

' . Materials Reviewed -

Trial testimony transcript(s) of: . '

Testimony Date(s):

Laboratory Report(s):

* Laboratory Number:,
Laboratory Number:
Laboratory. Number:

Pages:

20504028

Date: Mar 23, 1993

Date:

Date:

Examiner Bench Notes of: - RQ and unlqiown technician

Laboratory Number: 20504028

Page.

I of 3

Initials:

Was- any. other material reviewed? X Yes . No

If yes, please identify and/or describe.the material: Submitting agency letter dated May 1, 1992

Results of Review

File #: 95-1027167

Item or Specimen' # Reviewed: Qlj K2

> Review of Laboratory Report(s) and Bench Notes:

Note: Numbered comments are required below or on
additional pages, for any "No" or "Unable to Determine" Responses

1 ) Did the examiner perform the appropriate tests in a scientiWly acceptable manner/based on the
methods, protocols, and analytic techniques available at the time of the original examination(s)?

. □ Yes BNo □ Unable to Determine

2) Are the examination results set forth in the laboratory reports) supported and adequately documented in

the bench .notes7 • □ Yes- 4 /No □ Unable to Determine-

Review of Testimony:

Note: Numbered comments are required below or on
additional pages for any "No" or "Unable to Determine" Responses

■^Transcript not available.

3) Testimony consistent with the laboratory report(s)?

• p Yes

□ No.

• .□ Unable to Determine

4) Testimony consistent with the bench notes?

□ Yes

□ No

□ Unable to Determine

5) Testimony within bounds of examiner’s expertise?

•□Yes

□ No

□ Unable to Determine

Page

1, of 3

Initials:

Comments

(Set forth by above question #, if applicable.
Use "Additional Comments" Sheet, if needed) .

File#:, ■ 95-1027167* •

#1. The examiner chose to perform solubility tests on the K fibers. Infrared analysis was.available at this time

and is a.much more specific analysis and allows'for the determination of the polymer sub-class of a synthetic

fiber. Infrared.analysis should have been performed on beige and gray K and Q fibers.

#2. The results are not adequately documented in the notes. The notes are not dated and are in pencil. The

technician did not initial the notes. The spectra for the beige' known fiber is marked '’Kl " and should be .

"K2' ! . The hair was deemed unsuitable for comparison with no documented reason or explanation.

Review completed at: 1:30 PM (Time), 09/ 15 / 99

(Date)

Total time spent conducting review (to nearest 1/4
hour):

LI

I hereby certify that I conducted this review in an independent, qnbiased manner and that the results of-my review

are fiilly documented on this report consisting of a total of pages.

(Date)

Page ^ of )
Initials: